Investors can get new board and CEO elected, but more relevant question would be why would they do this?
Why would that be critical to reasons why they hold Nintendo stock? Just buying more devs doesn't really make
them broadly relevant as MS or Sony (w/ Epic holding) are, it just increases demands to justify investment ratio.
I would compare them to Apple and nobody demands Apple do this or that buyout, or do buyouts generally.
If they already make high profits from their niche market, most would be happy in prudently managing that.
Since it's not really competitive as such, it's not really at risk of decline just from other parties' developments.
Buying out more studios doesn't exactly change the fundmental equation, so how is that such a priority that
would motivate investors to force change in Nintendo policy? Only rationale would be if they think Nintendo
is currently undervalued and such a combo would vaslty unlock it's value, but that's not remotely clear IMHO.